Parkrose SD 3 board reviews budget changes, authorizes supplemental budget to appropriate loan proceeds

At a June 22 public budget hearing, Parkrose SD 3’s chief financial officer, Sherry, presented changes that reduced planned staff cuts and described a supplemental budget to allow spending of recent loan proceeds.

Sherry said the district’s adopted budget is $94,096,283, up from $93,436,295 — roughly a 0.7% increase. She told the board the district had initially planned a 26.375 FTE reduction in the proposed budget but, after retirements and negotiated furlough days for some employee groups, the net staff reduction in the adopted budget was roughly 13.25 FTE. "We started out with 26.375. The net result of the change was 13.25," Sherry said.

Sherry described two classroom additions in the adopted budget: a pre‑K classroom funded in part by Multnomah County and a communication classroom at Shaver paid from savings tied to declining out‑placement costs. She estimated that placing those students in district communication classrooms — rather than outplacing them through MESD — could avoid per‑classroom costs in the $130,000–$180,000 range.

On short‑term financing, Sherry told trustees the district sold investments and received approximately $3,700,982 on June 4 and must appropriate those funds by a supplemental budget and inter‑fund transfers to permit spending while keeping proceeds segregated per loan covenants. "We sold these investments on June 4; they went into our general fund. Because of the agreements in the loan document, they had to be segregated funds," she said. She explained the accounting treatment using the LGIP (local government investment pool) and noted the loan repayment estimate for the term (principal plus interest) would be about $3,759,525.

Sherry also highlighted revenue adjustments: a roughly $247,001 change in the general fund, an ARCH/Archdex payment that added about $49,000 and a state revenue increase near $59,000. She asked trustees to approve required resolutions (ED‑1 and schedules A/B) to notify taxing authorities.

Trustees asked questions about furloughs, timing of reimbursements for special‑education costs and the mechanics of the LGIP transfers. No formal public in‑person commenters addressed the budget during the hearing.

The hearing concluded with the district moving to add the supplemental budget and resolutions to a consent or action agenda for formal board approval.